What is the average erect penis length worldwide and by country?
Executive summary
Major systematic reviews and compilations put the worldwide average erect penis length in the mid‑teens of centimeters: a widely cited 2015 systematic review gives 13.12 cm (5.17 in) for erect length (measured by health professionals) and several country‑level aggregations report global means in the 13–14 cm range (e.g., 13.12 cm and 13.6–13.9 cm) [1] [2] [3]. Country rankings vary across datasets—with Ecuador and DR Congo frequently appearing near the top (≈17–18 cm) and several East/Southeast Asian countries near the lower end (≈9–10 cm)—but methodological differences and heavy reliance on self‑reporting limit comparability [4] [2] [3].
1. What the best systematic review says — the clinical baseline
The most authoritative peer‑reviewed summary often cited is a 2015 systematic review that pooled studies measured by health professionals and reported an average erect length of 13.12 cm (5.17 in) and average erect circumference of 11.66 cm (4.59 in); that review is the basis for many later summaries and is frequently presented as the clinical baseline [1]. This figure comes from measured—not self‑reported—data, which researchers regard as more reliable than survey answers [1].
2. Country rankings: multiple datasets, similar patterns but different numbers
Visualizations and compilations published in 2024–2025 (drawing on Veale et al. 2014, Lynn 2013 and other sources) map country‑level averages for 142+ countries and commonly place Ecuador, DR Congo, Cameroon and parts of South America and Central/West Africa near the top (often >16–17 cm), while several East and Southeast Asian countries appear lower (sometimes reported ~9–10 cm) [4] [2] [3]. For example, Visual Capitalist’s map based on Data Pandas lists Ecuador at 17.6 cm and notes DR Congo, Cameroon and Venezuela among the highest [4]. Data Pandas itself reports a global mean of 13.12 cm and ranks Ecuador at 17.59 cm and Thailand near the low end at 9.43 cm [2].
3. Why country‑by‑country comparisons are shaky
Researchers and data aggregators warn that measurement technique matters: many country lists mix professionally measured data with self‑reported surveys, and self‑reporting is prone to upward bias and inconsistent definitions (base‑to‑tip vs. gland only, measurement during full rigidity vs. partial) [5] [2]. WorldData cautions that some country samples are very small and not representative, and that from an erect length of about 12 cm no dependence on body size is detected—so small sample sizes or biased sampling can distort country rankings [3].
4. Conflicting aggregators — different adjustments, different averages
Commercial and popular sites that compile these figures apply different corrections for self‑report bias and combine different source lists; as a result, reported “global averages” can differ by a few millimetres to nearly a centimetre. For instance, WorldData notes a global stiff (erect) mean around 13.6 cm in its presentation [3], Data Pandas reports 13.12 cm [2], while other compilers claim 13.9 cm or similar—these discrepancies reflect differing inclusion criteria and statistical adjustments rather than new biological discoveries [2] [6] [3].
5. What the numbers do and don’t say about individuals and populations
Medical literature emphasizes that penis size varies widely within countries and that average differences between countries are smaller and more uniform than popular culture assumes; average length does not predict fertility, sexual satisfaction, or general health at the population level [5] [1]. Some reviews also note cultural misperceptions—many men overestimate the global average (one 2020 review found most men believed the average erect length exceeded 15.24 cm) [1].
6. Practical takeaways and reporting caveats
If you need a single evidence‑based reference: use the 13.12 cm figure from the professional‑measurement systematic review as a clinical benchmark [1]. For country‑level comparisons, treat visual rankings (e.g., Ecuador ≈17.6 cm; DR Congo ≈17–18 cm; Thailand ≈9.4–9.6 cm in some datasets) as indicative trends rather than precise truths because of mixed methods, small samples, and self‑report bias [4] [2] [3]. Aggregators vary; always check whether values are from measured studies or adjusted self‑reports before drawing conclusions [2] [5].
Limitations: available sources do not provide a single authoritative, fully representative country‑by‑country dataset measured uniformly; most widely circulated country lists combine heterogeneous sources and adjustments [5] [2] [3].